Attachment and Bonding

The terms "attachment" and "bonding" are often used interchangeably, as though they had similar implications. However, they have quite distinctive meanings. Bonding actually refers to the parent's tie to the infant and is thought to occur in the first hours or days of life. Attachment, in contrast, refers to the relationship between infants and primary caregivers, which develops gradually.

Parent to infant bonding has been argued to occur quite suddenly, especially upon first contact with the infant immediately after birth. There is no such implication in the term attachment. As with any vital relationship, there can be no instant attachment. Rather, the infant-caregiver relationship builds over time. It evolves through a series of characteristic phases, with each phase drawing on the one before. In fact, newborn infants are not yet capable of attachment, since they have little ability to distinguish one person from another and no concept of a permanent object. Because attachment refers to a relationship and not simply an experience of the parent, it is not appropriate to say that an attachment relationship has formed until the second half year. Even then the relationship is not fully formed or fixed. It continues to evolve toward what John Bowlby called a "partnership" during the preschool years and to be elaborated thereafter.

From the bonding perspective there are critical moments just following birth when the parental tie must be formed. Analogies are made to imprinting in birds and other animals, and there is a focus upon holding the infant and mutual gaze. Whether for mother or father, such experiences are thought to cement the connection with the infant. Following such an opportunity a permanent bond will be formed. Without such an opportunity the possibility of ever forming a bond is called into question. For better or worse the relationship is fixed, and the child's well-being is thought to hinge upon this.

The Ups and Downs of "Bonding"
While the concept of bonding has been useful, it also has had many unfortunate implications. On the positive side it did encourage changes in rigid hospital policies which had disenfranchised mothers and families. Now parents are often encouraged to greet and engage the new infant. And this is fine. It is a normal and important part of the human experience. However, this term, and the surrounding mythology, implied that when parents did not have opportunities for early skin to skin contact (for example, in the cases of prematurity or adoption), they could never adequately bond to the infant and that the child's emotional health might be permanently compromised . Not so poignant, but equally unfortunate, was the implication that if there was an opportunity for early bonding, the job of parenting was nearly complete. Both ideas have been shown to be wholly mistaken by more than a decade of research (see below).

The bonding concept also is misleading in implying that these very early experiences are highly salient for the infant. But the newborn, whose neocortex is scarcely functional, has virtually no capacity to retain experiences at this time. The time after birth is often, though certainly not always, a magic moment for parents. After all, infants commonly are awake and alert at this time. However, there is no reason to believe it is a meaningful experience for the infant. It is much later that infants can truly share emotional experiences with their parents.

Attachment: A Lifelong Commitment
From the attachment or relationship perspective, all of early childhood experience is important. While the specific attachment between infant and caregiver does not emerge until the second six months of life, it builds upon the history of interaction that precedes it. Just as relationships between adult partners are based on what they do together over time, so the infant-caregiver attachment is built upon all that is shared over the weeks and months of early childhood.

It is in this sense that the early days and weeks of life are important. They mark the beginning of the process of getting to know each other. But the first weeks are no more important than later weeks and months. The quality of the relationship depends on the entire history of care. If the infant experiences consistent, dependable care that is responsive to his signals and needs, he will develop an abiding confidence in care and trust in self and others. This is what is meant by a secure attachment relationship. It cannot be instantly achieved, nor can it be lost in the early days of life. Those who cannot have immediate contact with their infant may have some catching up to do, and those who adopt may have some early history to overcome and a period of readjustment, but secure attachment relationships, characterized by parental love and infant trust, remain the norm.

Research has demonstrated the strength of the attachment relationship. Studies have shown that premature but otherwise healthy newborns, separated for an average of two weeks at birth, were just as likely as full-term infants to be securely attached by the end of the first year. Likewise, infants adopted in the first half year are as likely to be securely attached as infants raised from birth by their natural parents.

Finally, there is evidence that even when attachments are not secure at the end of the first year they may yet change. Such "anxious attachments," as they are called, can become secure even in a 6-month period if the quality of care changes, which tends to occur when the parent's own life circumstances change toward the better.

Both attachment theory and the bonding perspective emphasize early experience and the critical role of infant-parent relationships in later development of the child. In fact, the mechanisms involved in the attachment process are so important to human development that the concept of unattached children is not very meaningful . Under only the most bizarre circumstances, such as a child being reared in an institution without a parent, would a child not form an attachment to one or more caregivers.

Yet even within attachment theory there are limits to what the infant can "cope" with. If too much time passes without the opportunity to form a stable, supportive relationship the child may develop a fundamental handicap in the ability to form other relationships in the future. Children moved from placement to placement or who experience repeated or unresolved losses of parents are at serious risk for developmental problems, especially since it is more difficult to alter an insecure relationship than to build a secure relationship in the first place. Still, the situation is not nearly so rigid as implied by the bonding concept. One has months, if not years, to build the relationship with the young child, rather than hours or days. And even when early relationship development goes awry, opportunities for change remain. Only when there is a lack of stable, responsive care over an extended period of time do children seem to become locked in helplessness or an antagonistic stance toward the social world.